Dublin Airport (Passenger Capacity) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-08 ============================================================ Darragh O'Brien (FF), Dublin Fingal East I am not accepting amendment No. 18. The amendment is looking to have an environmental impact assessment every two years. Let us say, for example, there is a situation where the DAA wants to develop something. It would have to make a planning application. That would be the case for any infrastructure. This Bill does not deal with infrastructure, but with the cap itself. If the DAA wanted to build a new terminal, a new pier, a new stand or whatever, it would have to go and make a planning application. That is important. It would have to be environmentally assessed by the planning authority. Under this legislation, I have mandated that the making of an order also be environmentally assessed before any order is made in relation to the airport cap. That is clear. I have already highlighted the planning decision on the DAA’s infrastructure application. We discussed that at some length over the course of the last nearly two hours. That application seeks to raise the passenger cap to 40 million and provide for much-needed additional infrastructure at Dublin Airport. Anyone travelling out of the airport right now will see the work happening in terminal 1, which badly needed refurbishment work. I remember when terminal 2 was opened in 2008-09. Many commentators, and some politicians in this very Chamber, said it would be a white elephant, a waste of money, would never be used, was not needed and should not be done, but now it is full. We had many arguments against terminal 2 at the time, including cost and all that. Let us imagine what the airport would be like right now if we did not have it. The reason I am saying that is the planning application is there right now. To reiterate, if this legislation passes - and I hope it will; I am quite sure it will at this stage - we will have to enact it. It will go through a process then. The environmental reports and assessments will be submitted to An Coimisiún Pleanála. An Coimisiún Pleanála will then submit them to me and then we will make an order on foot of that. While that is happening, Fingal County Council is making its decision on the infrastructure application. ANCA has commenced its consultation on noise and it will be open until 3 September. That is important because it deals with a lot of the noise issues that we are talking about. We want to know what people think about that draft decision. That then goes back in and it feeds into Fingal's infrastructure decision on the infrastructure application the DAA has made. I do not know whether it will or not but if it grants that application and gives permission, that would supersede any order that I would make. That is that element of it done. It would then be about future growth within the airport. We have actually already started the review of that 2018 Act, which I debated from Opposition in the other House and actually supported it, but got changes to it. A lot of people at the time were very unhappy that ANCA was the noise regulator because they saw it sat within Fingal County Council. To be fair, as a separate entity, ANCA has proven its independence and expertise. It has done a really good job in the main in that regard. Others who wanted to put it in the IAA. Others did not want it at all. I think Shane Ross was Minister for transport at the time. That has been done. That is in place. This decision will be made. I do not have a timeframe. Hopefully it will be soon after the submissions from the public on the draft noise decision is made. That would feed into both. We have already started the review on that legislation to see where future planning for airports and Dublin Airport should sit. Should it be strategic infrastructure and go to An Coimisiún Pleanála? Should it stay within Fingal County Council? That is for another day. We have to deal with the reality of what we have right now, which is that there is an effective stay on the cap at the moment because of the current case that is being taken. The airport is able to operate above 32 million because there is a stay on the cap right now. It is important that clarity is given for future development and growth within the airport and that the airport is not going to drop 4 million passengers or else the airport is just going to stay at 32 million. That is not a sustainable way forward. New routes will not come to the airport and we will not be able to manage routes to other parts of the world out of Dublin. It will inhibit business and growth. It will restrict jobs. It would mean we would lose jobs, frankly. If we stayed at 32 million or reverted to 32 million, we would lose thousands of jobs in Dublin Airport. I do not want that to happen. They are normal, good people, who are working there whose families are deriving good incomes from various jobs within the airport. It is important that this is understood too. Many people in the north Dublin area want the cap lifted as well. That is just the reality of it. With regard to Senator Higgins's amendment, there would be no other piece of infrastructure in the country, that I am aware of, that would be subject to ongoing environmental assessments, which is what the Senator is proposing. There is no infrastructure that would require a constant loop of preparing material for assessments and having assessments carried out constantly. They would be done every two years. Does the Senator know how long these assessments take? It would be a constant hamster wheel of environmental assessments. It is madness. It would completely tie us. There would be no opportunity to grow anything and it would set a dangerous precedent. That is okay if the Senator does not want anything to grow. If you want to lose thousands of jobs in the airport, restrict people's ability to travel and restrict connectivity, then you will go with the Senator's amendment. That is what I am not going to do and that is why I am not going to accept it. All of that said, and I have been very clear earlier on, there are genuine issues that people have. A small number of residents need to be dealt with. I am firm in my belief that this needs to happen and that there is certainty around flight paths as well. We will carry out an independent assessment. I will instruct that there be an independent assessment of flight paths and operation of flight paths once this legislation passes and the decision is made. That has to be done at the appropriate time. I cannot have an independent assessment while there are pending decisions with regard to the operation of the airport. We will do it very shortly after that. Respecting the fact that the Senator has tabled her amendment, it would not work. It would tie the airport up in knots. This provision that she would put in exists nowhere else. It is one of the most important strategic assets that the State has, our major international airport, and the Senator would tie it up in knots by passing this amendment. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-07-08/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:55:10+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-07-08